Thanks Robert and Asher for your replies.
@ Robert
In my gut last night, as I reviewed the earlier exchange, I did some more research and came across the "work for hire" usage. This is DEFINITELY how I do NOT want to be seen. (I am your basic fine art photographer doing work for myself; then, if others like the results in an exhibition or local art show, they may purchase my prints.)
I had already been toying with the idea of moving from a hobbyist who is attempting to operate as a business, to taking the leap and officially become a part time business. Before this opportunity came along, I was deep into research of the basic elements of operating a business without any concern for art. Part of my research over the last 4 years has included much time spending studying marketing in general and art marketing in particular through many available online resources. (I am delighted to say that I just ordered Alain Briot's 2 fine art marketing books a few days ago!)
Last night, I discerned that these guys were ready to take me at my lowest bid based on my business inexperience. I had asked them what their marketing campaign budget was since the rule of thumb is to charge accordingly. The main guy refused to see the website as marketing. I asked what length of time they wanted to license the images for and was told "Forever." In point of fact, they want, in addition to the local images I have already created, additional local color from the surrounding communities for the main website's page slide show. They want some of my existing flower images to use behind the online obituaries and those remain online in perpetuity. Right there, I sensed a seeking to take advantage.
Then I was asked about doing the additional landscapes from towns in the region and, not having figure any kind of day rate established in advance, made a ridiculously low verbal quote (under $100). As I continued to research this morning. I kept running into the idea that the photographer needs to educate the client.
Long story short, I composed a modest Letter of Intention that outlined the different requests they had made, the specific number of shots they want the copyright to (and went on to describe exclusive rights and how it would less expensive for them) which amount to 5 definites and 1 optional as they had described them to me in the tour of the building we took.
The main partner had taken shots that are currently on the new site and they SCREAMED amateur. They also had absolutely no humans in them and came across very sterile and cold instead of the warm friendly atmosphere they really want to portray. I suggested that the conference room include that partner along with an unidentifiable model as customer. The other partner wanted the wall with all the framed certificates on it in the shot but they were both "thinking the shot".
I went on to list the surrounding towns and the shots that would most be identifiable as the particular community for viewers. The list includes 10 towns. I pointed out in the Letter of Intention that this would require a day's worth of travel and digital capture and stated my day rate as being a modest $500. But, as you experienced with your 1992 shoot, I KNOW they are spending thousands on the website development, using a Boston based company and a separate vendor as liason.
I added in a modest fee to license the already created images that was quoted to me by a friend and local photographer. But that $300 was supposed to have a licensing limit which the client claims can't be done (as described above). In our meeting, they expressed neither surprise nor concern. As our area is seriously economically depressed, I added in only a $20 per image post processing fee based on a national photographic organization's suggested range. An additional licensing fee must also be under discussion.
The main partner had also promised to give me credit on the website so I asked how he envisioned carrying that out since watermarked photos will distract from the image. Of course, I could prepare the watermark very faintly screened but, to me, that would defeat the purpose of getting my name out there and would do so in a way that is less than desirable.
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and experience, Robert.
Jean